Chu Kwok Bing v. M/S Fred Kan & Co (Solicitors for The Plaintiffs)

HCAL 305/2023

[2023] HKCFI 681

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST NO 305 OF 2023

________________________

________________________

_________________

D E C I S I O N

_________________

1.In the Form 86 filed on 27 February 2023, the Applicant identifies as the target of challenge “Judgment in respect of CACV 36/2020 (on appeal from HCA 1637/2015)”.

2.I believe no authority is needed for the proposition that the Court of First Instance has no jurisdiction, in the exercise of its judicial review function, to review a judgment of the Court of Appeal (“CA”). Nor could the solicitors for one of the parties in the underlying action be a proper respondent to an application like this.

3.In those circumstances, there is no need to address the issues in the action HCA 1637/2015, or the appeal to the CA which dismissed the appeal by the Judgment dated 19 April 2021 (“CA Judgment”), which has become the target of the proposed judicial review in these proceedings. I would merely note that, at §32 of the CA Judgment, the CA said that the 2^nd defendant’s appeal (i.e. the Applicant’s appeal) is frivolous and vexatious and an abuse of process.

4.The Applicant has said he would apply for judicial review prior to seeking leave to further appeal to the Court of Final Appeal (“CFA”). But that is misguided.

5.The CA Judgment is plainly not amenable to judicial review, and any further challenge could only be in the CFA (though I note in passing the significant delay).

6.The present application is dismissed, albeit with no order as to costs.

The applicant, acting in person